Is there anybody better on our side than Tony Snow? Honestly?

Well, those who adore this man MUST watch his recent speech at CPAC (video available here).

So, you think Nobel Laureate Al Gore is the only Democrat that can win meaningless awards from sycophantic Hollywoodans?

Well, think again, for on Sunday evening, presidential candidate Barack Obama (D-Ill.) won his second Grammy in three years (first win pictured to the right).

Deliciously, and possibly a foreshadowing of things to come, Obama's victory came at the expense of a Clinton.

As reported by Reuters moments ago (emphasis added throughout):

The "pimped out" controversy surrounding MSNBC's David Shuster - destined to be called "Pimp Gate" - took a turn for the bizarre when Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton sent a letter to Steve Capus, President of NBC News.

Published for all to see at the Washington Post's "The Trail" blog Saturday, the letter demonstrated a disturbing number of hypocrisies and double standards inherent in today's liberally biased media.

See if you can find them all (emphasis added to assist your search):

February 8, AP national writer Jocelyn Noveck announced that kids are fired up over the 2008 campaign-- but only mentioned those who like Democrats. The article was full of kids excited about Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and even John Edwards, but there was only one mention of children from GOP homes. Of course, they're out campaigning for Obama (h/t NBer Miamian).

Sure, Noveck covered children in New York City, but she couldn't find one child who supported a Republican? Well, she did mention some kids from GOP homes, you know, the kind who campaign for Obama (bold mine throughout):

It's never too late, apparently, for the Washington Post to make room on its op-ed page for a gratuitous display of Bush Derangement Syndrome (BDS), at least a comparatively mild case. On Saturday, more than two months after the December 2 Kennedy Center Honors and more than six weeks after they aired on CBS on December 26, the paper carried a piece from honoree Leon Fleisher, a pianist and conductor, about how “unhappy” he remains “that I was required to attend a White House reception on the afternoon of the gala” given “I am horrified by many of President Bush's policies.” Fleisher, who was honored along with Brian Wilson, Steve Martin, Diana Ross and Martin Scorsese, bared his angst in a column titled “My White House Dilemma.” He “wrestled” with the “dilemma” of going to the White House because:

In the past seven years, Bush administration policies have amounted to a systematic shredding of our nation's Constitution -- the illegal war it initiated and perpetuates; the torturing of prisoners; the espousing of "values" that include a careful defense of the "rights" of embryos but show a profligate disregard for the lives of flesh-and-blood human beings; and the flagrant dismantling of environmental protections. These, among many other depressing policies, have left us weak and shamed at home and in the world.

After publishing an astoundingly positive column about Republican presidential candidate John McCain Thursday, the Washington Post's David Broder must have felt the need to bash some conservatives or risk being excommunicated by his liberal friends.

Looking to make amends, Broder went on Sunday's "Meet the Press," and disparaged CPAC attendees as being "aginners" with "a limited constituency."

Yet, moments later, he returned to his McCain love-fest.

But, before we get there, here's what Broder had to say about CPAC (video available here):

A Yahoo photo slideshow of Ground Zero perfectly demonstrates the bias news agencies frequently insert into captions. Instead of just describing the photo, Yahoo included captions with partisan cheap shots unrelated to the image to score typical anti-War On Terror points (h/t NB reader Larry Jordan).

Out-of-place comments about waterboarding, the downturn in the economy and a criticism of Rudy Giuliani were captioned under photos of a smoking World Trade Center and Ground Zero rubble (bold mine throughout):

Slide 1: Early morning light illuminates the wreckage of the World Trade Center on September 25, 2001 in New York. The head of the CIA said Thursday it is uncertain whether the use of waterboarding, a form of simulated drowning widely condemned as torture, would be lawful if used today against Al-Qaeda detainees.

Over across the pond, the Brits are having a spirited discussion about Islamic law following a statement by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, that sharia is inevitable within the UK. This has pleased some of the more extremely politically correct people who are calling for the creation of a dual-tier legal system which would enforce the medieval dictates of Islamic sharia law.

While he may not be quite that foolish, it seems British journalist Martin Fletcher (h/t LGF) does appear to be more of the useful idiot, at least judging from an op-ed he published which praises his "brush with Islamic justice:"

As one who has been hauled in front of a Sharia court I would like to risk having my hand — or head — chopped off a second time by suggesting that the Archbishop of Canterbury just might have a point.

In one of the most egregious examples of MSM bias I've seen lately, Tim Rutten of the L.A.Times has blatantly lied about remarks that Vice President Cheney made at CPAC in a February 8th piece headlined "Bush's message for McCain." Rutten makes the outrageous claim that Cheney said he was "glad the administration had tortured people" during the Conservative Political Action Conference, but a review of the transcript of Cheney's remarks easily shows that this is not what he said at all. Rutten simply reorders the VP's words to get his desired meaning quite despite what was really said.

Here is what Rutten wrote on the 8th:

Meanwhile, in another part of the city, Vice President Dick Cheney was addressing the meat-eaters at the Conservative Political Action Conference. He told them that he was glad the administration had tortured people and that he'd do it again: "Would I support those same decisions again today? You're damn right I would."

Is Newsweek's February 18 cover story about conservative hatred for Republican presidential candidate John McCain a preview of how the mainstream media will attack the Arizona senator if he wins the nomination?

Before you answer, consider first the cover pictured to the right, with an obviously concerned McCain looking up at top conservative personalities amid the headline, "There Will Be Blood."

Not too subtle, is it?

Neither was the content of the article (emphasis added throughout):

For general discussion and debate. Possible talking point: Huckabee wins Kansas:

Mike Huckabee trounced John McCain in Kansas' caucuses Saturday, their first head-to-head contest, and told fellow conservatives he was in the Republican presidential race to stay.

"I didn't major in math," the former Arkansas governor told a cheering crowd at the Conservative Political Action Conference. "I majored in miracles, and I still believe in them."

What's going on here, folks? Why is Huckabee still in it? After all, the conventional wisdom last week, especially after Super Tuesday, was that he stayed in to hurt Romney and help McCain. Might that conspiratorial calculus have been errant? Is Huck in it to win it?

http://www.sfgate.co...

If you want to get a seat at
Tuesday night's Berkeley City Council meeting, you better start lining
up now. And you might want to bring earplugs. And a flak jacket.

Hundreds of protesters from across the country and the political
spectrum are expected to descend on City Hall with bullhorns, drums,
banners and plenty of vitriol in anticipation of the City Council's
debate over the Marines' recruiting station in town.

The ruckus started last week when the council voted to send a letter
to the Marines, calling them "unwanted intruders" for opening the
recruiting center on Shattuck Avenue last year. At the same time, the
council granted Code Pink a parking space and a sound permit to make it
easier for the peace group to conduct protests outside the center.

On Monday, Councilwomen Betty Olds and Laurie Capitelli introduced
an item for this week's meeting, asking the city to retract its
statements about the Marines and clarify that the city is against the
war, not against the armed forces.

Jon Meacham is frustrated. After taking over Newsweek in 2006 as editor, he hasn't managed to get it out of its long-term rut as the second-best in the newsmagazine business. He also seems to have developed a severe case of Economist envy:

After about an hour, there seemed to be no more questions for him, so Newsweek editor Jon Meacham turned to his audience—about 100 graduate students at Columbia journalism school—and said he had a question for them: Did anyone in the room read Newsweek or Time? There was a small, awkward rumbling before finally, a man shouted, "No!"

Kudos to the guy for standing up and telling the obvious truth: Newsweek isn't read by anyone short of Grandma and dental office patrons.

[A] synthetic product leeched of most human qualities. -- Frank Rich, on how Hillary Clinton is being marketed, Feb. 10, 2008.

If Frank Rich is the voice of elite liberal opinion, Hillary Clinton is in deep, deep trouble. How many folks on the Upper West Side and reasonable facsimiles thereof from Boston to Madison to LA will be opening their hearts -- or credit cards -- to Hillary after reading Rich's stunning indictment of Clinton and her campaign this morning?

The jumping-off point for Rich's column is the live prime-time special the night before Super Tuesday that the Clinton campaign conducted. Flashing his theater-critic roots, Rich panned it as a "boring" "pseudo-event," noting that "some in attendance appeared to trance out." But if the staging was bad, the substance was much, much worse in Rich's view. For he claims that it reflected nothing less than Clinton playing from a "thick deck of race cards."

Writes Rich [emphasis added]:

Here's more buzz about how much trouble Newsbusters eagle eye Mark Finkelstein has caused for MSNBC's David Shuster. (He was first on this, people.) Through the Inside Cable News blog, we see the blog Big Head DC reports buzz that bosses at MSNBC threatened to fire David Shuster "on the spot" when he didn't immediately pound his chest and ask for forgiveness for suggesting Chelsea Clinton was being "pimped out" by her mother:

Big Head DC has learned from sources inside the MSNBC camp that Phil Griffin, senior vice president at the network, “screamed” at reporter David Shuster for not agreeing to immediately apologize to Chelsea Clinton for saying on-air she had been “pimped out” by her mom’s campaign. Griffin threatened to fire Shuster “on the spot,” and it was only with intervention from Tim Russert that Shuster didn’t lose his position.

If for no other reason....please, vote.  And let Barry & Hillary land in the dustbin of history....where they belong.  (Full account at Blackfive).

This is from someone who is there...taking care of all those minor details of maintaining our freedoms for us.  Bless this man:

While the American media strives daily to erase the memory of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 and paint this war as an unjust occupation of a sovereign nation men like Mike and Nate are out here hunting down and destroying the enemies of the very freedom that allows our media to try and discredit us. Terrorism is real, evil is real, this war is real and real men and women are in this fight because righteousness and freedom are worth fighting for.

Want to know how Barack Obama would intend to run against John McCain? Consider this line from Obama's speech to the Jefferson-Jackson dinner this evening in Virginia:

This week, this week, we found out that the presumptive nominee of the Republican party will be Senator John McCain [scattered boos in the audience.] Now, I believe John McCain is a good man and a genuine American hero. And we honor his half-century of service to this nation.